Discrepancies between language versions EU VAT case law
8 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 2013 to 2013.
Search within this topicThe cases ↓
Provisions these cases interpret most
- Article 306 of Directive 2006/112/EC Special scheme for travel agents · 8 of these cases
The 8 cases, most recent first
Under each case, what the Court decided, from its summary. The summaries are AI-generated and are not official documents: open the case for the Court’s own text.
C-189/11 Commission v Spain
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Spain
Scope of the travel agents' special scheme, customer-based approach
Given the divergence between language versions, the scheme must be read purposively. Articles 306 to 310 follow the customer-based approach, so it applies regardless of whether the customer is the traveller or another operator reselling the package. The remaining three complaints succeeded. Spain infringed Article 306 by excluding retail agents' own-name sales, Articles 168 and 226 by the flat 6% invoiced and deductible amount (also discriminatory as limited to services supplied in Spain), and Articles 306 to 310 by allowing a global margin per tax period. The judgment settles that the margin scheme covers business-to-business sales of packages, so wholesalers and operators selling on to other agents fall within it and cannot be pushed onto the normal rules. Relevant to tour operators, wholesalers and travel intermediaries, and to advisers reviewing legacy national margin scheme practices.
C-193/11 Commission v Poland
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Poland
The travel agents margin scheme applies on the customer approach, not only to travellers
The Court dismisses the action as unfounded. Articles 306 to 310 are to be interpreted according to the customer based approach, so the scheme is not limited to supplies made to travellers themselves. The suggested risk that agents might apply the scheme when acting as intermediaries is not made out, since the second subparagraph of Article 306(1) expressly excludes that. Poland costs were awarded against the Commission. Decided with the parallel actions against France, Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal, Finland and the Czech Republic, this is the judgment that settled the customer approach across the Union.
C-236/11 Commission v Italy
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Italy
Travel agents' margin scheme, sale to another travel agent, customer or traveller
The action is dismissed. Given the divergence between the language versions, Articles 306 to 310 must be read in the light of the scheme's purpose, which is to simplify the VAT rules for travel agents and to allocate the tax on each individual service to the Member State of final consumption and the tax on the margin to the Member State of the agent. The customer-based approach serves both aims best, so the scheme applies whatever the type of customer, including an operator that assembles a package and sells it to another agent for resale. The fact that the scheme is an exception to be interpreted strictly does not justify a reading that would deprive it of its effectiveness, and the risk of agents applying it when acting as intermediaries is excluded by the second subparagraph of Article 306(1). The Commission is ordered to pay the costs. The judgment holds that Italy's customer-based application of the margin scheme is the correct reading of Articles 306 to 310, in one of the parallel infringement actions the Commission brought against eight Member States on this point. Relevant to tour operators and wholesalers selling packages to other agents for resale, and to advisers reviewing the margin scheme treatment of such sales.
C-269/11 Commission v Czech Republic
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Czechia
Travel agents' margin scheme, traveller approach or customer approach
The action is dismissed. Given the divergence between the language versions, Articles 306 to 310 must be read in the light of the scheme's purpose, which is to simplify the VAT rules for travel agents and to allocate the tax on each individual service to the Member State of final consumption and the tax on the margin to the Member State of the agent. The customer-based approach serves both aims best, so the scheme applies whatever the type of customer, including an operator that assembles a package and sells it to another agent for resale. Article 89 of Law No 235/2004 on VAT, which lets travel agents apply the scheme to supplies to persons other than travellers, is therefore compatible with the Directive. The Commission is ordered to pay the costs. The judgment holds that the Czech Republic's customer-based application of the margin scheme is the correct reading of Articles 306 to 310, in one of the parallel infringement actions the Commission brought against eight Member States on this point. Relevant to tour operators and wholesalers selling packages to other agents for resale, and to advisers reviewing the margin scheme treatment of such sales.
C-293/11 Commission v Greece
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Greece
Travel agents' margin scheme, customer approach or traveller approach
The action is dismissed. Given the divergence between the language versions, Articles 306 to 310 must be read in the light of the scheme's purpose, which is to simplify the VAT rules for travel agents and to allocate the tax on each individual service to the Member State of final consumption and the tax on the margin to the Member State of the agent. The customer-based approach serves both aims best, so the scheme applies whatever the type of customer, including an operator that assembles a package and sells it to another agent for resale. Article 43 of the Greek VAT Code, which the administrative circular of 10 July 1987 reads as also covering sales by one travel agent to another, is therefore compatible with the Directive. The Commission is ordered to pay the costs. The judgment holds that Greece's customer-based application of the margin scheme is the correct reading of Articles 306 to 310, in one of the parallel infringement actions the Commission brought against eight Member States on this point. Relevant to tour operators and wholesalers selling packages to other agents for resale, and to advisers reviewing the margin scheme treatment of such sales.
C-296/11 Commission v France
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · France
France was entitled to apply the margin scheme to sales to other travel agents
The Court dismisses the action as unfounded. Articles 306 to 310 must be interpreted following the customer based approach, so the special scheme is not restricted to sales made directly to travellers. The Commission was ordered to pay the costs incurred by France, and the seven intervening Member States bore their own. One of the eight judgments delivered on 26-09-2013 that settled the customer approach.
C-309/11 Commission v Finland
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Finland
Finland was entitled to apply the margin scheme to sales to persons other than travellers
The Court dismisses the action as unfounded. Articles 306 to 310 are to be interpreted according to the customer based approach, so the scheme is not confined to supplies made to travellers. The concern that agents might apply the scheme while acting as intermediaries is unfounded, because the second subparagraph of Article 306(1) rules that out expressly. Finland costs were awarded against the Commission. One of the group of judgments of 26-09-2013 that resolved the traveller versus customer question in favour of the customer approach across the Union.
C-450/11 Commission v Portugal
Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Portugal
Travel agents' margin scheme, customer approach or traveller approach
The action is dismissed. As in the parallel cases decided the same day, the divergence between language versions means that Articles 306 to 310 must be interpreted by reference to the scheme's purpose, simplification of the VAT rules for travel agents and a balanced allocation of the revenue between Member States, which the customer-based approach achieves best. The scheme therefore covers supplies made in the agent's own name to any customer, including another travel agent reselling the package, and Decree-Law No 221/85, which applies it to operations carried out in the agent's own name vis-à-vis the customer, is compatible with the Directive. The Commission is ordered to pay the costs. The judgment holds that Portugal's customer-based application of the margin scheme is the correct reading of Articles 306 to 310, in one of the parallel infringement actions the Commission brought against eight Member States on this point. Relevant to tour operators and wholesalers selling packages to other agents for resale, and to advisers reviewing the margin scheme treatment of such sales.